I once knew a Christian who liked to say, "He's so open minded he can't hold a conviction." I'm reminded of this because of the accepting/understanding distinction I think you've demonstrated as valid here. The opposite of my Christian acquaintance's statemtent is blind-faith.

I find the Buddha's take on open-mindedness to be very similar to what we call critical thinking (via your Youtube links) along with informal logic fallacies, attribution errors, cognitive biases, Albert Ellis' "irrational beliefs", and Aaron Beck's/David Burn's "cognitive distortions" and "self-defeating beliefs," etc....

In general, one of the most important things in all of this is the ability, will, and right to change one's mind when confronted with novel or contrary evidence to one's current views. It is a necessary condition for Buddhist wisdom/insight and critical thinking.

According to Buddha, viewing without craving is "viewing with wisdom", i.e. discernment of the four noble truths & path factors:

"And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path." - M 117

Those who don't discern stress,its cause,& where it totally stops, without trace,who don't know the path,the way to the stilling of stress: lowlyin their awareness-release& discernment-release, incapableof making an end, they're headed to birth & aging.

But those who discern stress,its cause,& where it totally stops, without trace,who discern the path,the way to the stilling of stress: consummatein their awareness-release& discernment-release, capableof making an end, they are not headed to birth & aging. - Iti 103

mirco wrote:...I'm having a hard time everyday working on not to feel unwanted emotions.

Hi mirco, Could you please clarify this? Are you saying you're trying to avoid negative emotions when they arise, or abdandon them when they arise, prevent them from arising, etc...?

I'm trying to suppress them or replace them, when arisen or when they are just about to arise. This I mostly do through compulsive overeating combined with watching of TV series.

Regards

IMO, merely experiencing or having them is not what makes them defiled (greed-based, hate-based, delusion-based), but how you behave towards them. IMO, wanting them to go away is hating them. IMO, wanting them to get replaced is being greedy for positive emotions. IMO, not knowing this and how your psychological reactions to them cause dukkha is being deluded about them. IMO, all very normal, ordinary, human things to do. Have you tried facing, challenging or otherwise exploring them? IMO, I bet they're tied to some cognitive distortions.

I once knew a Christian who liked to say, "He's so open minded he can't hold a conviction." I'm reminded of this because of the accepting/understanding distinction I think you've demonstrated as valid here. The opposite of my Christian acquaintance's statemtent is blind-faith.

I find the Buddha's take on open-mindedness to be very similar to what we call critical thinking (via your Youtube links) along with informal logic fallacies, attribution errors, cognitive biases, Albert Ellis' "irrational beliefs", and Aaron Beck's/David Burn's "cognitive distortions" and "self-defeating beliefs," etc....

In general, one of the most important things in all of this is the ability, will, and right to change one's mind when confronted with novel or contrary evidence to one's current views. It is a necessary condition for Buddhist wisdom/insight and critical thinking.

Thanks DanieLion,I actually saw something on The Buddha's method of Critical thinking a day or so ago I'll try to find in again. I don't know if it will be in the same vein as this thread but it certainly wouldn't detract.

But my signature is always worth remembering.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

mirco wrote:I'm trying to suppress them or replace them, when arisen or when they are just about to arise. This I mostly do through compulsive overeating combined with watching of TV series.

IMO, merely experiencing or having them is not what makes them defiled (greed-based, hate-based, delusion-based), but how you behave towards them. IMO, wanting them to go away is hating them. IMO, wanting them to get replaced is being greedy for positive emotions. IMO, not knowing this and how your psychological reactions to them cause dukkha is being deluded about them. IMO, all very normal, ordinary, human things to do.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Why do many people regard critical thinking skills this much important.

Buddhism is about meditation training. Anything in Buddhism is about having best progress in meditation training, since He was a meditation teacher. And in Buddhist meditation training thinking is dropped very early, that is from second jhana on.

Why overestimating critical thinking? Might it be, that there is a slight;) clinging to views, ideas and thinking?Maybe people like to identify with their thinking which in fact already is clinging?What about trying what the Tathāgata proposed and if it doesn't work get back to thinking oneself into Nibbana ;-)

mirco wrote:Why do many people regard critical thinking skills this much important.

Buddhism is about meditation training. Anything in Buddhism is about having best progress in meditation training, since He was a meditation teacher. And in Buddhist meditation training thinking is dropped very early, that is from second jhana on.

Why overestimating critical thinking? Might it be, that there is a slight;) clinging to views, ideas and thinking?Maybe people like to identify with their thinking which in fact already is clinging?What about trying what the Tathāgata proposed and if it doesn't work get back to thinking oneself into Nibbana

Regards

are you sure this is all the path or is there also Right view, Right intention, Right speech, Right action, right livelihood...Critical thinking is an important skill in making appropriate decisions in day to day life and in community settings, and even in asking or responding in the appropriate manner.The famous story of the monks who killed themselves while the Buddha was on self retreat is a fine example of the Buddha having to tell people the difference between apporopriate and inappropriate responces, in this case if they reflected appropriately on the situation and the practice they could of realised death was not the favourable option.Wise reflection on the four requisites is also an exercise and example of critical thinking, as is Vipassana. FWIW.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Cittasanto wrote:are you sure this is all the path or is there also Right view, Right intention, Right speech, Right action, right livelihood... Critical thinking is an important skill in making appropriate decisions in day to day life and in community settings, and even in asking or responding in the appropriate manner. The famous story of the monks who killed themselves while the Buddha was on self retreat is a fine example of the Buddha having to tell people the difference between apporopriate and inappropriate responces, in this case if they reflected appropriately on the situation and the practice they could of realised death was not the favourable option. Wise reflection on the four requisites is also an exercise and example of critical thinking, as is Vipassana. FWIW.

I'm cool with that. See, what one does influences how bad the mental hindrances are present.

So, i.e. Right speech, Right action and Right Livelihood are to build a ground, where less hindrances can grow. This leads to better progress in meditation.

As I see it, all of the proposals for daily life and in community settings are all build around that Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration can be done easily.

mirco wrote:I'm cool with that. See, what one does influences how bad the mental hindrances are present.

So, i.e. Right speech, Right action and Right Livelihood are to build a ground, where less hindrances can grow. This leads to better progress in meditation.

As I see it, all of the proposals for daily life and in community settings are all build around that Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration can be done easily.

Regards

what do you mean with the underlined part?

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Are you referring to: "This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!"?

It's obvious as to what may be "right" or "wrong". Can you give an example of something you might "offer" that would fit in to the "both" or "neither" category?

Thank you for clarifying.

Metta

No, the quote from the sutta on effacement

"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

but that is a rendering of the tetralema logic. something that is both could be something that is true yet there are factual errors, although I can not think of what neither could be off hand.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Are you referring to: "This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!"?

It's obvious as to what may be "right" or "wrong". Can you give an example of something you might "offer" that would fit in to the "both" or "neither" category?

Thank you for clarifying.

Metta

No, the quote from the sutta on effacement

"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Cittasanto wrote:but that is a rendering of the tetralema logic. something that is both could be something that is true yet there are factual errors, although I can not think of what neither could be off hand.

Thanks for clarifying. I'm glad I asked as I had misconstrued what it was you were trying to say.

OK, I sensed something going on in there besides what was obvious at first glance. I cannot speak for you, of course, but perhaps the reason that I can't give the other examples is because I don't have the "dhamma eye", yet that the Buddha and many of his disciples had.

Just my thoughts, of course. Your signature is being borrowed for this post

Much Metta

Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinatiThe flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors

Sambojjhanga wrote:OK, I sensed something going on in there besides what was obvious at first glance. I cannot speak for you, of course, but perhaps the reason that I can't give the other examples is because I don't have the "dhamma eye", yet that the Buddha and many of his disciples had.

out of curiosity what did you think was going on, and what was obvious?PM me the response if you prefer.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

mirco wrote:...is about having best progress in meditation training, since He was a meditation teacher.

You can't measure what's "best" without critical thinking. The Buddha taught a lot more than just sitting

mirco wrote:And in Buddhist meditation training thinking is dropped very early, that is from second jhana on.

And when he (and we) exit jhana, we stop thinking critically? Jhana, IF one uses it wisely (for vipassana), makes one a better critical thinker.

mirco wrote:Why overestimating critical thinking? Might it be, that there is a slight;) clinging to views, ideas and thinking?Maybe people like to identify with their thinking which in fact already is clinging?

No. Clinging to views and critical thinking are opposites. Critical thinking is an antidote to clinging.

mirco wrote:What about trying what the Tathāgata proposed and if it doesn't work get back to thinking oneself into Nibbana

Read Reverend Thanissaro's Skill In Questions (it's free; just Google it) and then tell me the Buddha didn't teach critical thinking and that he was JUST a mediation teacher.